Last August, after Ryan Braun got his Biogenesis suspension, his former friend, Ralph Sasson, sued Braun for defamation. The upshot: Sasson claimed that Braun doped while playing for the University of Miami, committed academic fraud, and accepted money while a student. He said that he helped Braun successfully appeal his original suspension back in 2011, and that Braun then turned around and talked smack about him to various people.

Now Ralph Sasson has finally struck out; a judge on Wednesday dismissed his case with prejudice as a sanction for the plaintiff’s “egregious” and persistent misconduct in the litigation . . . In a detailed, 15 page order issued Wednesday, Van Grunsven granted defense motions to dismiss the case as a sanction. The order recounts the history of Sasson’s sometimes over-the-top demeanor and questionable legal strategy throughout the case.

The biggest is violating the judge’s order that deposition testimony be sealed by telling people about what other people said in depositions. But it also sounds like he committed the full panoply of pro se plaintiff asshattery: frivolous discovery, refusing to produce his own discovery, name-calling and everything else.

Everyone hates lawyers, but they’re around for a reason, folks. It’s possible this guy had a legit claim against Braun. It’s possible that he didn’t. But being a self-lawyering jerk cost him any chance to make his case.

No. Everyone doesn’t hate lawyers, but they do hate idiot tabloid so- called sports writers who are just looking to dig up dirt on athletes to sell papers and website ads. Wait until you’ll need a lawyer, and we’ll see your reaction.

They were illegal drugs and all illegal drugs have been banned by MLB for a long time.

No, they weren’t.

SBNation: You wrote a famous memorandum to all MLB clubs in 1991 warning about steroid issue. It stated, in part: “The possession, sale, or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by major league players and personnel is strictly prohibited. Those involved in the possession, sale, or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance are subject to discipline by the commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game.” Your whole basis for the memorandum was the violation of federal law. You’re a lawyer. And yet it was utterly ignored. Why? And, had it been heeded, how would the sordid history of the past two decades be different?

Fay Vincent: The letter was ignored because it didn’t affect the players. They were thoroughly protected by collective bargaining. But I wanted to make a moral statement to them and legal one to everyone else. The union told them to ignore it. The only way a change could be made was through collective bargaining. The union argued that testing violated players’ civil liberties. The union had strong, bright lawyers who concocted a bulletproof legal argument.

I knew the memo would be ignored. But even more surprising was that no one in the press covered it. It turned out to be right, though. Federal law, much later, would assert itself.

Yep, just like the bowls of amphetamines in every club house, which have been illegal without a prescription (indeed, you couldn’t even get “greenies” in the US) since about 1970. While these things may have been technically banned, no one really cared if players used greenies or steroids until records were broken….because players had been using them regularly and commonly since at least the 1960s.

Here’s a simple thought exercise. Assuming jimmyt is correct (he’s wrong, but bear with me) and PEDs were already banned, then why did they have to ban them again in ’06?

paperlions - Jun 13, 2014 at 2:24 PM

Did they ban them, or did they just institute testing protocols and penalties for failed tests?

Technically, he is correct. MLB had a rule on the books that banned the use of any drug that was scheduled, which included steroids as soon as they became a schedule drug in 1991 (or so). The problem of course, is that there was no protocol for testing or for violating the ban and there were no established parameters for penalties, making the bans toothless PR rules (which is exactly what they were).

Maybe we also should consider that testosterone and various supplements are not illegal then or now. Quite ironic that MLB Radio, MLB and the MLB Channel (NBC for that matter) willingly take money from advertisers selling testosterone, HGH elevating drugs and various other ‘supplements’ to bring you commentary that ballplayers shouldn’t use what their advertisers are peddling.

paperlions - Jun 13, 2014 at 3:50 PM

Testosterone is illegal without a prescription. It is a Schedule III drug. Such drugs have medical uses and can be dispensed and prescribed for such approved uses. Dispensing those drugs for non-approved reasons or possessing them without a prescription is illegal.

Testosterone precursor drugs, like most the shat that is sold, are not Schedule III drugs.

Please understand, I don’t think anyone should take them, but peddling and profiting from the sale of the drugs and precursor drugs and then slamming players for using them meets the definition of ‘hypocrisy.’

– noun –
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense.